I'm not sure if the "up" keyword is being ignored or not. However, any
attempt to bring the interface up (other conbinations of keywords seem to
attempt is, as does dhclient), produce the same error messages.

I didn't make the claim that ifconfig doesn't honour "up". I said that I
don't *think* it's needed to bring up wireless, i.e. IIRR one does

'ifconfig ural0 192.168.99.234 chan 13 blahblahblah'

and the wireless comes up. If you go back and read what I wrote again
you'll hopefully see that the sarcasm was unjustified.

Note to Ed: I can't imagine what's going wrong except that you haven't
told us EXACTLY what you are doing and which commands you've tried.

Have you got the correct country sets loaded for card and AP, BTW? I've
been bitten like that myself.
--
mark south: world citizen, net denizen
echo [email]znexfbhgu2000@lnubb.pb.hx[/email]|tr a-z n-za-m

I didn't make the claim that ifconfig doesn't honour "up". I said that
don't *think* it's needed to bring up wireless, i.e. IIRR one doe

'ifconfig ural0 192.168.99.234 chan 13 blahblahblah

and the wireless comes up. If you go back and read what I wrote agai
you'll hopefully see that the sarcasm was unjustified

Note to Ed: I can't imagine what's going wrong except that you haven'
told us EXACTLY what you are doing and which commands you've tried

Have you got the correct country sets loaded for card and AP, BTW? I'v
been bitten like that myself
--
mark south: world citizen, net denize
echo [email]znexfbhgu2000@lnubb.pb.hx[/email]|tr a-z n-za-

10-04-2007, 02:00 AM

unix

Re: Worse ural0 problem: IOERROR

On Wed, 05 Oct 2005 10:26:49 +0200, Mark South wrote:
[color=blue]
> Note to Ed: I can't imagine what's going wrong except that you haven't
> told us EXACTLY what you are doing and which commands you've tried.[/color]

I've tried various things, including exactly the suggestions made here,
but the same error always seems to result.
[color=blue]
> Have you got the correct country sets loaded for card and AP, BTW? I've
> been bitten like that myself.[/color]

The AP is beyond my control and is known to work. I can't see anything
about country sets in the ural driver.

I think now that the hardware is a slightly different revision, so I'm
going to contact the driver maintainer.

On Wed, 05 Oct 2005 10:26:49 +0200, Mark South wrote
[color=blue]
> Note to Ed: I can't imagine what's going wrong except that you haven'
> told us EXACTLY what you are doing and which commands you've tried[/color]

I've tried various things, including exactly the suggestions made here
but the same error always seems to result
[color=blue]
> Have you got the correct country sets loaded for card and AP, BTW? I'v
> been bitten like that myself[/color]

The AP is beyond my control and is known to work. I can't see anythin
about country sets in the ural driver

I think now that the hardware is a slightly different revision, so I'
going to contact the driver maintainer

Begin <uWM0f.684$R62.213@news-virt.s-kddi1.home.ne.jp>
On 2005-10-05, Mark South <mark.south@null.invalid> wrote:
[posting once is enough, I think?][color=blue]
> I didn't make the claim that ifconfig doesn't honour "up". I said that I
> don't *think* it's needed to bring up wireless, i.e. IIRR one does
>
> 'ifconfig ural0 192.168.99.234 chan 13 blahblahblah'
>
> and the wireless comes up.[/color]

An ifconfig <if> <address> implies an extra `up' keyword, as well as
adding a route for the subnet to the interface. If you don't give the
address, an `up' may become necessairy. To counter ``but I use DHCP
and I don't need to add up'' arguments: at least the isc dhclient will
attempt to bring up the interface if necessairy.

--
j p d (at) d s b (dot) t u d e l f t (dot) n l .

10-04-2007, 02:00 AM

unix

Re: Worse ural0 problem: IOERROR

Begin <uWM0f.684$R62.213@news-virt.s-kddi1.home.ne.jp
On 2005-10-05, Mark South <mark.south@null.invalid> wrote
[posting once is enough, I think?[color=blue]
> I didn't make the claim that ifconfig doesn't honour "up". I said that
> don't *think* it's needed to bring up wireless, i.e. IIRR one doe[/color]
[color=blue]
> 'ifconfig ural0 192.168.99.234 chan 13 blahblahblah[/color]
[color=blue]
> and the wireless comes up[/color]

An ifconfig <if> <address> implies an extra `up' keyword, as well a
adding a route for the subnet to the interface. If you don't give th
address, an `up' may become necessairy. To counter ``but I use DHC
and I don't need to add up'' arguments: at least the isc dhclient wil
attempt to bring up the interface if necessairy

"Really? Is OpenBSD unique in this respect?" was laying it on a bit thick.
[color=blue]
> I was asking an honest question.[/color]

OK, suppose we agree that there's nothing for either of us to be offended
about and carry on with the technical bit.
[color=blue]
> I wasn't accusing you of anything. The problem is one could take the
> sentence 'I don't *think* the "up" keyword gets used to ifconfig
> wireless...?' to mean nearly anything.[/color]

I'll explain further: I have never needed to use "up" as an argument to
ifconfig in order to start up a wireless card. So I wasn't sure whether
it's superfluous or harmful. Hence the **s around think.
[color=blue]
> I was asking for clarification and expansion because I was interested in
> what you had to say.[/color]

OK, let's continue to communicate nicely.
[color=blue]
> I clearly indicated my direct experience with wireless devices on OBSD
> was limited, but in my experience on BSD like systems the up keyword is
> required to bring the device, well, up.[/color]

Indeed. And my experience may be based on a bug in ifconfig for all I
know.
--
mark south: world citizen, net denizen
echo [email]znexfbhgu2000@lnubb.pb.hx[/email]|tr a-z n-za-m

"Really? Is OpenBSD unique in this respect?" was laying it on a bit thick
[color=blue]
> I was asking an honest question[/color]

OK, suppose we agree that there's nothing for either of us to be offende
about and carry on with the technical bit
[color=blue]
> I wasn't accusing you of anything. The problem is one could take th
> sentence 'I don't *think* the "up" keyword gets used to ifconfi
> wireless...?' to mean nearly anything[/color]

I'll explain further: I have never needed to use "up" as an argument t
ifconfig in order to start up a wireless card. So I wasn't sure whethe
it's superfluous or harmful. Hence the **s around think
[color=blue]
> I was asking for clarification and expansion because I was interested i
> what you had to say[/color]

OK, let's continue to communicate nicely
[color=blue]
> I clearly indicated my direct experience with wireless devices on OBS
> was limited, but in my experience on BSD like systems the up keyword i
> required to bring the device, well, up[/color]

Indeed. And my experience may be based on a bug in ifconfig for all
know
--
mark south: world citizen, net denize
echo [email]znexfbhgu2000@lnubb.pb.hx[/email]|tr a-z n-za-

10-04-2007, 02:00 AM

unix

Re: Worse ural0 problem: IOERROR

On 06/10/2005 2:47 AM, Mark South wrote:[color=blue]
> On Wed, 05 Oct 2005 18:23:46 -0400, clvrmnky wrote:
>[color=green]
>>On 05/10/2005 4:26 AM, Mark South wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>>On Tue, 04 Oct 2005 15:25:07 -0400, clvrmnky wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 04/10/2005 2:52 PM, Mark South wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, 04 Oct 2005 15:30:23 +0100, E. Rosten wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>In my earlier post, I was missing an ovbious configuration detail. However
>>>>>>there are worse problems now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Device is a Belkin F5D7050 wireless adapter.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Kernel logs on plugging in:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>ural0 at uhub0 port 2
>>>>>>ural0: Belkin Belkin 54g USB Network Adapter, rev 2.00/0.01, addr2
>>>>>>ural0: MAC/BBP RT2570 (rev 0x05), RF RT2526, address xx:xx:xx...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>These errors are generated when I try to do
>>>>>>ifconfig ural0 up media autoselect
>>>>>>:
>>>>>>ural0: could not write MAC register: IOERROR
>>>>>>ural0: could not write MAC register: IOERROR
>>>>>>ural0: could not read MAC register: IOERROR
>>>>>
>>>>>I don't *think* the "up" keyword gets used to ifconfig wireless...?
>>>>
>>>>Really? Is OpenBSD unique in this respect? The only wireless devices I
>>>>have are on OS X, and these definitely honour the up keyword for ifconfig.
>>>
>>>I didn't make the claim that ifconfig doesn't honour "up". I said that I
>>>don't *think* it's needed to bring up wireless, i.e. IIRR one does
>>>
>>>'ifconfig ural0 192.168.99.234 chan 13 blahblahblah'
>>>
>>>and the wireless comes up. If you go back and read what I wrote again
>>>you'll hopefully see that the sarcasm was unjustified.
>>>[/color]
>>
>>What sarcasm?[/color]
>
> "Really? Is OpenBSD unique in this respect?" was laying it on a bit thick.
>[/color]
I honestly don't know how to say it any better. I was using a more
conversational style as I didn't want to sound like I was jumping in to
challenge your statement.

So, the fact that I tempered my remarks to be more casual led you to
believe otherwise. After more than a decade of USENET it still
surprises me anyone understands anyone else.

[...][color=blue]
> I'll explain further: I have never needed to use "up" as an argument to
> ifconfig in order to start up a wireless card. So I wasn't sure whether
> it's superfluous or harmful. Hence the **s around think.
>[/color]
Yup, and I found that interesting, because on OS X (for example) the
device ain't up until you make it up. Since the core part of OS X can
be considered a BSD in many respects, this prompted the question.

[...][color=blue][color=green]
>>I clearly indicated my direct experience with wireless devices on OBSD
>>was limited, but in my experience on BSD like systems the up keyword is
>>required to bring the device, well, up.[/color]
>
> Indeed. And my experience may be based on a bug in ifconfig for all I
> know.[/color]
I was just wondering if this was unique behaviour to OpenBSD, since you
seemed to have a certain amount of experience. After several years in
the tech business I've learned to ask questions of people who know more
about something. That's all. Nothing more.

Since we've talked at length on how we talked on length, I guess this
particular horse is dead, Jim.